BF2S Forums An open letter to the Clintons

I'm outraged over it.
Where is the U.N. leading the way?

Other parts of the world suggest that the UN has been the puppet of the US since its inception. The UN only has as much power as the dominant world power nation is willing to put into it. Therefore, we're still not off the hook on African Genocide.

But we digress. Let's get back to Clinton shall we?

kr@cker wrote:

I don't know if you meant to, but your income graph is just of one very specific demographic, while overall income was up, and he most likely meant the Dow, at least that's what I usually refer to, I believe it had a short spike in 99 that was dramatic yet shortlived, a 1500 point or so drop immediately afterward

Let's take a look at that "short spike in 99".



Under Clinton, the Dow more than doubled.

Under Bush, it's up 11%.

And why would anyone use the Dow as an indicator anyway? A price-weighted index of 30 stocks is not going to give you a true picture of the market. Compare that to the S&P 500, a float-weighted index of 500 stocks.

The more I look at the numbers, the more I appreciate what an incredible economic turnaround we experienced under Clinton. By many measures, one of the periods of greatest economic advancement in American history.

Meanwhile people wistfully eulogize Reagan as having Done So Much For The Economy. I don't get it.

Lewis Black said it best......."Congress is nothing more than a republican standing up and saying 'I have a  bad idea' and then a democrat stands up and says ' I can make it shittier' " .

ATG wrote:

I'm outraged over it.
Where is the U.N. leading the way?

Yeah your sig is comedic...true the jihadis are a problem...but so are the crazy religious right trying to take us back into the dark ages. Religion is just a buncha people to lame to make decisions for themselves. Oh yeah and if history doesnt concern you...lol!

*rolls eyes*

Aenima_Eyes wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

So funny ATG complains to Clinton about all kinds of insignificant shit but not one important thing like "Thanks for slaughtering 100,000 Iraqis!"  or "Thanks for filling the air in the middle east with the unlawful use of depleted uranium that has caused birth defects and other ailments for generations to come!"  No, we see that you failed to keep your 8 year old son from watching an overinflated sex scandal.  Seriously, did it effect you that Clinton got a blow job?  That he wished to keep it secret instead of trying to make ammends with his humiliated wife?  Or can you not think of people as people but as some sub-species because you dont' agree with them?

ATG, I'm sorry you're an angry, simple-minded, backwards thinking fool, but Clinton lieing about getting blown by a fat intern did not kill 100,000 iraqis.  Clinton's "high crime or misdemeanor" that he got impeached for is hardly comparable to the shredding of "that goddamned piece of paper [constitution]" that Bush has done.  It's nothing compared to purposefully planning to invade Iraq since he took office (yes, even Abrahmoff knew about it long before "diplomacy started in 2002"), which invasion has made the US and it's interests much, much more at risk of attack.   And NO, Clinton's lie about a blow job is not even close to being something to frown on compared to the debt our country is in.  If you can't see that, then you are a used and abused tool of a corrupt group of anti-americans also known as neo-conservative republicans.  And your reward will be just.

I thought Saddam was the one that slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. . .and that's why we found all those mass graves.....

Cept Saddam had a head start. You with him being the pesky ruler and alll. But  Bush will catch up! I mean, torture levels are now higher than when saddam was in power...how come that wasnt on his press release...

deeznutz1245 wrote:

golgoj4 wrote:

there is so much bs in that...i dont even know how to respond, excpet for this. Thanks for not killing 2700+ of my brothers in arms over an imagined enemy and a demented political agenda. Thanks for not making us into the terrorist by stripping our right slowly while the dumber elements in America cheered on chanting 'security'.

No man is perfect and that fact that u losers still go on about Clinton demonstrates the current lame-o tactic ala Karl Rove - Point fingers and demonize the other guy without addressing how little you stand for / ar about. Clinton was President, bush is president...why are u retard living in the past and not addressing what going on today? I got a mr fusion and a delorean if u need a ride to 2006...

I believe in security measures, am I the "dumber element"? I dislike Bush but I believe in rounding up the terrorists, not infiltrating Iraq, does that make me dumb too? Can I ask you a question? What makes you so wise to what goes on around the world? I am assuming you have served in our armed forces or something because you seem to have the answers, you just arent sharing them.

Ok you apparently missed what I said so i wil put it in bullet form:
-Clinton Didnt invade Iraq on a false pretense. He admits to trying and failing to get bin laden...bush had him cornered and went somewhere else.

-Distraction and demonization are classic tactics of the current administration. Ask Ann Richards, John Kerry, or even a Vietnam POW John McCain. They will inform you. Or google will.

-Security is NOT the imagined rules that they give us. Its not the color coded 'how scared you should be to day' system. I have my own opinions on how security could be achieved but considering how many times i've been past the tsa with 'items' or see how they intend to 'protect us' i laugh.

-I dont think I said I was pro-terror and wanted to let them run free. And you are an idiot for somehow getting that from my post. Sorry if I am not willing to sacrafice my liberty for security so swiftly. The way I see it, they can decide im Nigerian and ship me off to gitmo the way things are going.  That and the fact that its contrary to everything I belive (and the constitution). Im tired of quoting Franklin, but he said it best: Those who would sacrafice liberty for security deserve neither.

-Im wise? Thanks! thats a 1st! Maybe its all that time spent reading articles from various sources as much as possible as to whats going on in the world.  I dont see myself as wise. Just the bare minimum of reason...

-'...not infiltrating Iraq...' esplain!

-the answers are infront of you. The ability to glean those answers from whats presented to you is a whole other story.

Sorry if i offended you by calling you dumb, but as an American, I take certain things very seriously. The removal of rights and the shredding of the constitution is a serious matter to me. In what America were you raised that these same things aren't important to you?

Last edited by golgoj4 (2006-10-04 11:08:46)

Just think with our next President everybody will critique, bash and flame that person.. What a nifty cycle it is.

kr@cker wrote:

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

What does that have to do with anything?

we were discussing the repeated record finishes of recent years and that was the only previous time that the dow closed at a comparable rate

The Dow "closing at a rate"? Huh? That doesn't make sense. There is no velocity in a single data point. I think you mean "level".

What I don't get is how anyone can look at the following charts and have as their key takeaway a "short spike in 99". The market tripled over 7 years - absolutely astounding  - but your read of the Dow is "I believe it had a short spike in 99 that was dramatic yet shortlived, a 1500 point or so drop immediately afterward"? Yeah, it did have a short spike in 99 that was one of about a hundred short spikes that led to the biggest, swiftest rise in the history of all equity markets in America. And no, as you see from the chart, it was not "shortlived". The Dow tripled under Clinton and kept steady at 10K. That's a market re-rating. A paradigm shift.

Aenima_Eyes wrote:

So, thanks for once again showing how Clinton and the .com faggots abused the marketplace and caused a swift drop in stocks.  Then we got attacked. . .of course the economy tanked for a bit.

1) Abused the marketplace eh? Explain your thoughts.
2) Swift drop? You mean that 10% swift drop? The one that followed 6 years of a steady TRIPLING of the market?
3) "faggots"?

Good stuff, Aenima

Stop arguing about the state of the economy under such and such president. Government influence does relatively little to change the economy, and one or another president's policy is of minor involvment.

On the other hand, Federal deficit is directly related to policy. I don't think I need to cite the current President's results.

deeznutz1245 wrote:

golgoj4 wrote:

deeznutz1245 wrote:

I believe in security measures, am I the "dumber element"? I dislike Bush but I believe in rounding up the terrorists, not infiltrating Iraq, does that make me dumb too? Can I ask you a question? What makes you so wise to what goes on around the world? I am assuming you have served in our armed forces or something because you seem to have the answers, you just arent sharing them.

Ok you apparently missed what I said so i wil put it in bullet form:
-Clinton Didnt invade Iraq on a false pretense. He admits to trying and failing to get bin laden...bush had him cornered and went somewhere else.

-Distraction and demonization are classic tactics of the current administration. Ask Ann Richards, John Kerry, or even a Vietnam POW John McCain. They will inform you. Or google will.

-Security is NOT the imagined rules that they give us. Its not the color coded 'how scared you should be to day' system. I have my own opinions on how security could be achieved but considering how many times i've been past the tsa with 'items' or see how they intend to 'protect us' i laugh.

-I dont think I said I was pro-terror and wanted to let them run free. And you are an idiot for somehow getting that from my post. Sorry if I am not willing to sacrafice my liberty for security so swiftly. The way I see it, they can decide im Nigerian and ship me off to gitmo the way things are going.  That and the fact that its contrary to everything I belive (and the constitution). Im tired of quoting Franklin, but he said it best: Those who would sacrafice liberty for security deserve neither.

-Im wise? Thanks! thats a 1st! Maybe its all that time spent reading articles from various sources as much as possible as to whats going on in the world.  I dont see myself as wise. Just the bare minimum of reason...

-'...not infiltrating Iraq...' esplain!

-the answers are infront of you. The ability to glean those answers from whats presented to you is a whole other story.

Sorry if i offended you by calling you dumb, but as an American, I take certain things very seriously. The removal of rights and the shredding of the constitution is a serious matter to me. In what America were you raised that these same things aren't important to you?

I honestly did not read your reply to me because it looked long, statistacal and boring. Um, if I say something that yu already said forgive me. I did skip to the end though. What I found interesting was you asking me what "america was I raised" . I served honorably in the U.S. Marines kiddo so DO NOT lecture me about rights. I am well aware of your rights because they were provided to you by people like me. Next, I never had anything against you (for the record) I just did not agree with your stance that Americans wanting heightened national security were idiots (or whatever you said). I beleive in it because I have seen first hand across the world what happens when our guard is let down. Wake up. There is a large amount of extremists in the world who want you an I dead not because of who our president is but because we are AMERICAN. Martha fucking stewart could be our commander in chief and they still want us dead. I will NEVER be ashamed of my country, I have to much blood, sweat and tears invested in it. I am not saying you are but I am suggesting you slow your fucking role before you go out calling people idiots for wanting to be safe, no matter the cost.

Never thought I would debate a scared marine. Didnt think they existed. But here goes...

Maybe you should read more and bark less devil dog. The fact that you were a Marine makes me respect you more so I will ask you this: Do we as Americans trade out essential liberty and trample the constitution in the name of security? It seems to run contrary to the beliefs that this country was founded upon. So WHY in the HELL are you telling me to wake up when our government who has PROVED their ineptitude wants to strip the very liberties that would allow us to check their power? Any argument that we should shutup and do what we are told on applies in a battlezone. You know this and I know this. But this is the CIVILLIAN world buddy, which means that now, as scary as it is, the guy telling you whats what IS NOT the absolute authority. So instead of me waking up, maybe its you who needs to wake up and TRULY protect the constitution instead of slowly letting it slip away and barking at those of us who truly understand the essence of America and dont just parrot thoughts given to them by other. Just based on the fact that you couldnt be bothered to read the post indicates the arrogance of your post. And they ARE IDOTS for wanting 'security' at the expense of liberty. Sorry if i actually believe in the Constitution and not my own wet pants.

And in the future, if you expect to be spoken to, bring something to the table other than a longer winded, rehashed version of your original post. I expect better from the Marine Corps.

Make no mistake. If i didnt give a shit about my home, I would fucking move to Canada. But I rember the oath that I took when I joined it said all enemies 'foreigh AND Domestic'. Some people only think the terrorist  s are the ones that hate America. I would submit that there are plenty of people here that would be happy if it were a dictatorship too. Yeah im harsh. But you know what? I mean what I say because I truly belive that this country is battling enemies on both sides of its borders. Im not saying the Marine im responding to is my enemy. He is my countryman. But I would ask that he take a long hard look @ what hes saying because it truly conflicts with the morals and ideas this country was founded on.

Last edited by golgoj4 (2006-10-04 14:51:41)

Shopvac wrote:

Second, How on God's green earth can you say that Clinton's foreign policy was wrong. Some idiots voted for Bush when he campaigned on a platform of "no nation building." Even "Bush the Second" said that Clinton's foreign policy was too involved. At least Clinton tried to prevent genocide in places like Albania, and in the former Yugoslav republics. Some here have suggested that The US is bordering on genocide in certain areas. I would not go that far, but where is the outrage over Darfur, and other Central African Nations where the indiscriminate violence would make Thor (the mighty god of war) vomit.

President Clinton's' Foreign Policy, huh? what, thats an oxymoron.
Ummm.... Maybe it's already been said, buy I will remind you all, that Pres. Clinton forced the Israelis to let Mohammad Atta free, after his bombing there, in 1998. Does that name ring any bells? Yeah he's the Al-Queda cell leader that  was involved with 9/11. Why did Pres. Clinton in his infinite wisdom force them to do that?= He wasn't looking for lasting Peace, he was looking for a piece with his intern! How easily some forget...